This is why I also think there's some merit in deciding not to discuss TV at all any more

Have you met us?

I'm fine with the current setup, but not discussing television would make me unhappy.

I don't watch the shows discussed in Natter. I'm a year behind on Dr. Who. I don't have premium channels and I'm not likely to. I like Supernatural, but in a rather distant, non-squeeing way. The board is unlikely to want to discuss L&O: CI, even though I'd like some discussion of it beyond "OMG. Vincent is so hottt!!!!" I just don't think we can be all things to all people.

Which means I pretty much won't be in that thread to discuss Bones because I don't watch House but have plans to, as such I won't in it.

Hmmm. A puzzlement I'm not sure how to resolve.

Some like bucket threads and how that works, some like single show threads and how that works.

I think the issue, though, is more that some shows won't sustain a thread. Those are tougher issues than the ones that probably could go on their own. It is a hard balance. Is the current arrangement (whitefont in Natter) working better for you than you think a mixed thread would?

Frankly, I'd probably get more mileage out of separate BSG and SG threads - and I suspect that both of those are among our heavier trafficked shows, and could probably thrive. Are there others among the current batch that would be worth giving a trial run, maybe in conjunction with a (trial) bucket thread or two?

One problem is that it's so seasonal. While Eureka is on the air, it could certainly support its own thread, but not during the six-month hiatus.

At the end of it all whichever camp has the majority will get the threads as they like it and the other camp won't.

At the risk of stating the obvious, the voices of anti-proliferation have not typically come out on top when it comes to voting. We have a VM thread, a Lost thread, and a Heroes thread.

Right now, the main shows that people have proposed adding to Premium (character-driven morally ambiguous arcy FX dramas) are either not discussed at all, or are discussed fleetingly and superficially in Natter. Right now, there's no discussion to exclude anyone from, because our current thread structure isn't optimized for such a discussion to occur in the first place.

Some like bucket threads and how that works, some like single show threads and how that works. Those two things seem pretty non-mixy to me. At the end of it all whichever camp has the majority will get the threads as they like it and the other camp won't. I don't see much of a way around it.

If we go with trial threads we could do both - it's just that the single show threads would need to generate enough talk on their own to justify their existence whereas most bucket threads should be able to hit that mark easily.

I think the broad bucket threads in bon's proposal are probably too big.

But it might be worth trying that approach anyway and see what kind of dynamic it stirs up. My gut is that we'll get a kind of TV land Natter in there, but that might be enough to sustain regular conversation on many shows.

I think the issue, though, is more that some shows won't sustain a thread. Those are tougher issues than the ones that probably could go on their own. It is a hard balance. Is the current arrangement (whitefont in Natter) working better for you than you think a mixed thread would?

Natter doesn't work for me, there's too much going on in there. For me I kinda like a slow moving thread. I can't keep up with a lot of posts. I don't mind the idea that a thread might be pretty quiet a lot of the time and then pick up when something interesting happens on the show, or only have a lot of activity on the night that the show airs.

I feel like the sticky point to bucket threads is not the people who don't watch some of the shows; they can skim. But bucket threads seem to be a problem for people who don't want to hear details for shows that have aired, but that they haven't watched and don't intend to watch for at least several months. And while I have sympathy (as the woman who never sees a movie until it comes to Netflix), I do think that it places a bit of a burden on the rest of the community to try to accommodate that wish.

That's not to say that I don't see the burden that it otherwise puts on the people who want to remain in the dark. I can see why it feels like one is being excluded, but I don't think that's actually what is happening.

One problem is that it's so seasonal. While Eureka is on the air, it could certainly support its own thread, but not during the six-month hiatus.

I guess I don't understand why it's a big problem if a thread sits quiet for a few months while a show is on hiatus. Threads for shows that aren't on hiatus will pick up.

Okay. Which shows, though? Honestly, so far it seems like the shows that are currently in Boxed Set could manage that. Possibly several of the Premium ones. That kind of supports the bucket thread idea - that they're generating sustained discussion.

For the shows that don't have a home currently - what shows do we think we want more discussion of, and what shows do we think will generate that kind of conversation? The shows that SA mentioned first off, maybe - but I get the idea that the bucketing was kind of the point there. So which shows are we thinking might be good for at least a provisional one-show thread? Most of the shows currently housed in Natter - I don't know. I don't see it for House or Bones. A bucket for reality would save me some scrolling, but I certainly don't see any that would hold up a thread. Maybe SPN or Friday Night Lights. Others?

And if bucket threads will help us suss that out, maybe we should start there anyway. Even if it won't help everybody, it's still a net gain for discussion.